271 posts shown.
goldencyclist60 said:In quantities so massive they couldn't be achieved through a standard diet, it might spike blood triglycerides, but it won't increase body fat. Too many calories --> increased body fat.
First off, GI isn't the metric that matters here. Insulin response depends on volume. What actually counts is GL—which is basically just GI adjusted for serving size (glycemic load). Second, as I've already stated, even a relatively small amount is enough to trigger the pancreas to dump enough insulin to completely shut down catabolism.
And look, there aren't any references for that claim (and I suspect there's a good reason why)...
Instead, take http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21108071 as one of the more recent reviews...
Notice that this specifically addresses NORMAL intake...
Where are the references for that article?
References 1. ^ Sucrose
References 1. ^ Sucrose, International Chemical Safety card 1507, Geneva: International Programme on Chemical Safety, November 2003
2.^ a b C "Sugar : World Markets and trade". United States Department of Agriculture. November 2011.
3.^ A. Beevers, T. R. R. McDonald, J. H. Robertson and F. Stern (1952). "The crystal structure of sucrose". Acta Cryst 5 (5): 689–690. doi:10.1107/S0365110X52001908.
4.^ Hynes, R. C.; Le Page, Y. (1991). "Sucrose, a convenient test crystal for absolute structures". Journal of Applied Crystallography 24 (4): 352. doi:10.1107/S0021889891002492.
5.^ "Sucrase", encyclopædia Britannica Online
online 6. ^ Lemieux, R. U.; Huber, G. (1953). "A chemical synthesis of sucrose". J. am. Chem. Soc. 75 (16): 4118. doi:10.1021/ja01112a545.
References 1. ^ a b Sidney Mintz (1986). Sweetness and Power : The Place of Sugar in Modern history. Penguin. ISBN 978-0-14-009233-2.
8.^ a b Taubes, Gary. (April 13, 2011). is Sugar Toxic ?. The New York Times.
Gray GM (1971). "Intestinal Digestion and Maldigestion of Dietary Carbohydrate". Annual Review of medicina 22: 391–404. doi:10.1146/annurev.me.22.020171.002135. PMID 4944426.
^ ten Kaneko JJ. Carbohydrate metabolism and its diseases. in Kaneko JJ, Harvey JW, Bruss ml. Clinical Biochemistry of Domestic Animals, San Diego, CA: Academic Press (2008) p. 46 ISBN 012370491.
^ ten, Svetlana; Maclaren, Noel (2004). "Insulin resistance syndrome in children". J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 89 (6): 2526–39. doi:10.1210/jc.2004-0276. PMID 15181020.
Alexander Aguilera, Alfonso; Hernández Díaz, Guillermo; Lara Barcelata, Martín; Angulo Guerrero, Ofelia; Oliart Ros, rosa M. (2004). "Effects of fish oil on hypertension, plasma lipids, and tumor necrosis factor-alpha in rats with sucrose-induced metabolic syndrome". J. Nutr. Biochem. 15 (6): 350–57. doi:10.1016/j.jnutbio.2003.12.008. PMID 15157941.
^ Fukuchi, Satoshi; Hamaguchi, Kazuyuki; Seike, Masataka; Himeno, Katsuro; Sakata, Toshiie; Yoshimatsu, Hironobu (2004). "rola of Fatty Acid Composition in The Development of Metabolic Disorders in Sucrose-Induced Obese Rats". Exp. Biol. Med. 229 (6): 486–93. PMID 15169967.
14.^ Long-term administration of a sucrose-rich diet to normal rats : relationship between metabolic and hormonal profiles and morphological changes in The endocrine pancreas Chicco Fainstein-Day Gutman R. ; Gagliardino J. J. Gomez Dumm C. L. (1996). Metabolism 45 (12): 1527–32. doi:10.1016/S0026-0495(96)90183-3. PMID 8969287.
15.^ Joint Who / FAO Expert Consultation, 2003, "Who Technical report Series 916 Diet, Nutrition and The Prevention of Chronic Diseases", Geneva
Geneva 16. ^ Diet , Nutrition and The prevention of dental Diseases, Paul Moynihan, Who Collaborating centar for Nutrition and Oral health, School of dental sciences, University of Newcastle and Poul Erik Petersen, Who Collaborating centar for Community Oral health Programmes and research, University of Copenhagen, Public health Nutrition: 7(1A), 201–226
17.^ "Pure, White and Deadly", John Yudkin, Viking, 1986 ISBN 0-14-008353-7.
18.^ Yudkin J, Roddy J. (1964). "Levels of dietary sucrose in patients with occlusive atherosclerotic disease". Lancet 2: 6–8.
19.^ "What causes tooth decay?". Animated-teeth.com. Retrieved 2010-05-05.
20.^ Tooth Decay. Elmhurst.edu. Retrieved on 2011-11-18.
21.^ What causes tooth decay?. Animated-teeth.com. Retrieved on 2011-11-18.
22.^ Tanzer, JM (1979 Aug). "Essential dependence of smooth surface caries on, and augmentation of fissure caries by, sucrose and Streptococcus mutans infection". Infection and immunity 25 (2): 526–31. PMC 443577. PMID 489122.
23.^ "Glycemic index and by-products of sucrose Sucrose". Diabetesnet.com. Retrieved May 5, 2010.
Baschetti, R (2004). "Evolutionary legacy: form of ingestion, not quantity, is the key factor in producing the effects of sugar on human health". Medical hypotheses 63 (6): 933–8. doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2004.07.018. PMID 15504559.
25.^ Essential information regarding diet and diabetes management. diabetes.niddk.nih.gov. Accessed 2011-11-18.
26.^ National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. cdc.gov. Accessed 2011-11-18.
27.^ Dietary reference intakes: core principles for nutritional labeling and fortification. National Academies Press. 2004. ISBN 0-309-09132-2.
28.^ Spikes in gout cases linked to sugary beverages, BBC News, February 1, 2008.
29.^ "Nutrients for Gout – the good and the bad – Doctor's Corner Newsletter Archive". ABCVitaminsLife.com. 2007-07-30. Accessed 2010-05-05.
30.^ Refer to table 6, page 56 of the Who Technical report Series 916 Diet, Nutrition and The Prevention of Chronic Diseases
31.^ The Great Sugar Debate: Is it Vegan?. Vegfamily.com. Accessed 2011-11-18.
32.^ a b Yacoubou, MS, Jeanne (2007). "Is Your Sugar Vegan? An Update on Sugar Processing Practices" (PDF). Vegetarian Journal (Baltimore, MD: The Vegetarian Resource Group) 26 (4): 16–20. Accessed 2007-04-04.
33.^ a b "Forced Labor". The National Archives, US Government. 2010.
34.^ a b George Rolph (1873). Something about sugar: its history, growth, manufacture and distribution.
35.^ Adas, Michael (January 2001). Agricultural and Pastoral Societies in Ancient and Classical History. Temple University Press. ISBN 1-56639-832-0. p. 311.
36.^ "Sugarcane: Saccharum Offcinarum". USAID, US Government. 2006. p. 7.1.
37.^ Walton Lai (1993). Indentured labor, Caribbean sugar: Chinese and Indian migrants to the British West Indies, 1838-1918. ISBN 978-0-8018-7746-9.
38.^ Steven Vertovik (Robin Cohen, ed.) (1995). The Cambridge survey of world migration. p. 57-68. ISBN 978-0-521-44405-7.
39.^ K Laurence (1994). "A Question of Labour: Indentured Immigration Into Trinidad & British Guiana, 1875-1917". St Martin's Press. ISBN 978-0-312-12172-3.
40.^ "St. Lucia’s Indian Arrival Day". Caribbean Repeating Islands. 2009.
41.^ "Indian indentured laborers". The National Archives, US Government. 2010.
42.^ "Agribusiness Handbook: Sugar beet white sugar". Food and Agriculture Organization, United Nations. 2009.
43.^ a b Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Faostat.fao.org (2011-05-17). Accessed 2011-11-18.
44.^ Miraski, Benjamin (June 5, 2008). "Sugar's money, influence continue to plague domestic candy companies". Medill Reports.
45.^ Bolling, Suarez, Christine, Nydia R.. "The Brazilian Sugar Industry: Recent Developments". Brazil, sugarcane, sugar, ethanol, production, exports, prices.. USDA. Accessed 11/10/11.
46.^ January 2010 Newsletter, IBS Treatment Center
47.^ The Oxford English Dictionary lists both spellings as acceptable, though "castor" was historically more common.
48.^ Dacice and the world’s first sugar cube. dacice.cz
49.^ EC – Export subsidies on sugar. (PDF). wto.org. Accessed 2011-11-18.
50.^ Agriculture – Sugar. Ec.europa.eu (2004-07-14). Accessed 2011-11-18.
51.^ ACP Group of States – The Fiji Communiqué on Sugar. Acpsec.org (2007-05-03). Accessed 2011-11-18.
52.^ International Sugar Trade Coalition. Sugarcoalition.org. Accessed 2011-11-18.
53.^ The New York Times, October 18, 2007, Seeing Sugar’s Future in Fuel
54.^ The New York Times, November 11, 2003, America’s Sugar Daddies
55.^ "Sugar Daddie$". Mother Jones. 1997-05-01. Accessed 2010-05-05.
56.^ Sugar. FLO (Fairtrade Labelling Organizations International)
57.^ European Commission – External Trade – Trade Issues. Ec.europa.eu (2010-05-06). Accessed 2011-11-18.
58.^ Sugar Association. Sugar.org. Accessed 2011-11-18.
Are those enough references for you?
goldencyclist60 said:I agree with the bulk of what you said, but... 😁
of course it isn't black and white; that's exactly my point.
As for bodybuilding and insulin, the spike required to maximally inhibit muscle protein catabolism following training doesn't need to be abnormally high. It happens even with moderate amounts of Glycemic index and by-products of sucrose Sucrose. Glucose alone won't achieve anything more.
And yeah, a proper diet aimed at hypertrophy doesn't actually differ drastically from the kind of athlete's diet I personally advocate for. The issue is that current practices are incredibly skewed. Look at almost any bodybuilder's regimen, and chances are it isn't actually optimal for their specific goals. The fact remains—which supports my argument that training takes precedence—that many have succeeded DESPITE their diet, not BECAUSE of it.
Even if we assume your premise is correct—though I'm not entirely convinced—there's a second issue: fructose, which is baked into table sugar. While glucose sits at 100, Glycemic index and by-products of sucrose Sucrose has a GI of 65. Because of its glycemic load, sucrose has a noticeably lower GI, but you run into the fructose problem, which can drive fat tissue accumulation.
Glycemic index and by-products of sucrose
Sucrose is a disaccharide made up of 50% glucose and 50% fructose and has a moderately high glycemic index of 64, about the same as honey, 62, but not nearly that of maltose, which is a disaccharide made up of 100% glucose (i.e., 2 parts glucose), 105,[23] which, in turn, causes an immediate response within the body's digestive system. As with other sugars, sucrose is digested into its components via the enzyme sucrase; to glucose (blood sugar) and fructose. The glucose component is transported into the blood (90%) and excess glucose is converted to temporary storage in the liver - named glycogen.
The fructose is either bonded to cellulose and transported out the GI tract or processed by the liver into citrates, aldehydes, and, for the most part, lipid droplets (fat).I'm pulling this from here because I can't be bothered to hunt for more, and it seems sufficient given the references:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sucrose
goldencyclist60 said:I’m not sure if you realize this, but burgers and beer actually have a place in a balanced diet... A "proper" diet isn't defined solely by the specific foods we eat.
Besides, I don't see how your point differs from mine here, since it seems we're essentially on the same page.
By "proper," I’m referring specifically to diets tailored for muscle hypertrophy—the kind most weekend warriors at the local Gold's Gym follow—as well as fat loss protocols.
We mostly agree. I’ve done some reading, including your blog.
I have no desire to debate nutrition with you since you’re the professional here, but I will point out that nothing is black and white. You can't just tell someone to load up on sucrose after a workout without knowing their specific goals or their discipline. We know glycogen depletion during standard hypertrophy training isn't massive; if a trainee wants to maximize mass, they're better off with maltodextrin or glucose to trigger an insulin response, rather than just trying to rapidly refill glycogen stores, which isn't even necessary. Nutrition depends on the athlete's goals, genetics, the sport itself, and their current training phase. It is impossible to give a blanket recommendation on what anyone needs and in what quantity.
Timing is also critical. If I can afford to grab a cheeseburger before a session, that doesn't mean a marathon runner or a competitive swimmer can do the same without facing major GI distress. They might be able to handle it two hours post-workout, or perhaps during a carb-loading phase before a race, but certainly not as their final meal before competing.
goldencyclist60 said:slydriver52, you nailed most of that, but I have to build on a few points and I definitely disagree on others.😁.
First, let’s clear up why we use more than one type of carbohydrate for recovery, beyond just the difference in muscle vs. liver glycogen storage. It comes down to oxidation rates. The maximum oxidation rate for a single type of carb is roughly 1 g/kg of lean body mass per hour. By adding a second type, you can push that up to 1.3 g/kg.
Jeukamp and Jensen suggest a glucose:fructose:galactose ratio of 2(3):1:1.
It was therefore surprisingly observed that both the carbohydrate blend with fructose and the carbohydrate blend with galactose were two-fold more effective in stimulating glycogen synthesis than the proposed maltodextrin+glucose blend.
That is why maltodextrin (a glucose polymer) is preferred as a glucose source; it lowers the osmotic load that plain monomeric glucose creates.
I cannot agree with this at all. In elite athletics, precise nutrition accounts for maybe that final 5-10% margin—and that's being generous. In any discipline, including bodybuilding, training is the foundation; nutrition is the support system. Sure, in bodybuilding, the diet carries more weight, but it still doesn't supersede the training itself.
I’ll give you a quick answer because I’m heading to work.
The reason you disagree is simple: you clearly haven't dealt with the intensity of training specifically for competition. If I can grab a burger and still crush an elite-level workout, then "perfect" nutrition isn't my priority. I think you misunderstood me; I never said nutrition isn't important, I said *perfect* nutrition isn't nearly as critical for certain athletes. Training takes precedence—I've proven that myself. When you're building peak performance (strength, explosiveness, endurance, agility, etc.), strict dieting matters less than it does for a bodybuilder. Your main concern is managing caloric intake so you don't ruin your conditioning by gaining unnecessary mass. What exactly is on your plate matters far less than hitting your daily calorie targets, provided you watch your pre- and post-workout meals. Of course, genetics play a huge role too. It’s not that black and white. ..........................
We could debate this until tomorrow.
Besides, I’ll have a beer before bed to help my muscles relax; it works wonders when I'm exhausted. 😉
My performance improves week after week without a "perfect" diet.
Fructose is typically blended into athlete recovery drinks in small amounts—I don't recall the exact ratio—but glucose and maltose always take center stage. The data shows that a specific carbohydrate combination is the gold standard for an athlete's post-workout glycogen recovery. However, the playbook changes for bodybuilding and fitness enthusiasts. Since their primary goal is hypertrophy rather than rapid glycogen replenishment, they lean heavily toward maltose, glucose, or even insulin manipulation to drive growth.
It’s common knowledge that glucose and maltodextrin trigger the pancreas to spike insulin production. This makes them the go-to choice immediately following a session. That said, glucose has higher osmolality, so you have to be careful about consuming massive quantities right after training. Ultimately, your carb source depends entirely on your discipline. Since most people here are recreational lifters focused on building muscle—rather than marathon runners, swimmers, or soccer players—glucose and maltodextrin are your best bets. If you aren't chasing extreme muscle mass, you don't need to overcomplicate things; a simple chocolate milk will do the trick just fine.
As I’ve pointed out before, nutrition is the absolute foundation in aesthetic sports like bodybuilding. In contrast, for strength athletes, runners, or swimmers, the training methodology itself takes precedence. You build elite performance through specialized programming; in bodybuilding, you build the physique through nutrition first, then refine it with training.
Nicholas Gomez84 said:Alright, thanks for the input, everyone!
I know Inkospor carries stock at Helix and that shop over on the outskirts near the highway...
If I recall correctly, Inkospor is also stocked at XXL in North Jersey. Give them a call and verify.
Steven Lopez35 said:This is my second supplier. I’ve picked up ON 2.27 twice from them, and I’ve done the exact same thing with my first guy. Results are identical both times.
🙂
I don't get it. If they’re supposedly advanced enough to seal that cap with a black shrink band so perfectly it looks factory-sealed, why on earth wouldn't they just glue down that paper seal? It isn't even foil; it's just basic paper. Why leave it like that if they want to prevent tampering? It makes zero sense.
Don't let this get under your skin too much. It’s likely just a minor issue caused by humidity in the warehouse, maybe some dust settling on the seal after the tub was moved, or a simple lapse in the sealing process during production. The Optimum tubs available here are filled in Europe since the brand owner is based in Ireland. Because they source their packaging in Europe, it differs from the American Optimum lineup. The European containers are shorter and have a matte finish, whereas the US versions are glossier and slightly larger. If you truly suspect the product isn't legitimate, I suggest we start a collection right here on the forum. We can take a sample to a lab like the FDA or a local public health institute for professional testing.
Arthur Sanchez79 said:You didn't specify which whey you're using. I highly doubt we're looking at an absorption issue with concentrates—we aren't talking about isolates or hydrolysates here. Regardless, this is a dead end; I’m pro-whey, and clearly, you are too. 🙂
I'm talking about whey blends, obviously. It's rare to find a manufacturer offering nothing but pure concentrate these days. You might stumble upon one, but the giveaway is usually a lower price tag.🙂
Make no mistake: you won't notice any difference in your physique whether you're sipping a basic whey, a complex blend, or just eating chicken and white bread after your workout.
briskbison55 said:Did I read that correctly? That protein converts into glucose? :-) If so, the logic is flawed. That process typically only kicks in during metabolic disorders or—much more commonly—when you're absolutely smashing excessive amounts of protein. Stick to a smart intake and you won't have a problem.
It sounds a bit off to me too, but apparently, that's the claim, regardless of how much you eat. Ugh.
Do you really think major brands like BSN would bother offering blends if they didn't make sense, rather than just sticking to pure Whey?
I was also raised on that old-school bodybuilder myth about mixing Whey with glucose.🙂
briskjackal5 said:You think it's cheaper and faster than prepping a meal... Not exactly a substitute for lunch, though.
Whey isn't going to cut it as a full lunch for me.
Unless you've switched over to following the Herbalife nutrition plan? 😁
-Stipe
Fair enough, I misspoke. I use it as a snack, not a main course.🙂
Arthur Sanchez79 said:So what’s actually the benefit of a shake? If you aren't buying it through eBay, it might save you a few cents, maybe. 🙂 You can just eat solid food, but Whey hits the bloodstream faster.
That’s exactly why casein or egg protein is added to formulas—to slow down the oxidation and absorption of the Whey. Look, I’m no doctor or scientist, so I won't lecture anyone on the biochemistry, but if experts like Jungas RL, Lacroix, Magali, and Biorie Y say that's the case, there's likely some truth to it.🤷
I can get my Whey at great prices, even lower than what you'd find on eBay.😉
Sure, Whey is fast, but I remember seeing a study posted on a forum once showing that while Whey has a slight edge over other protein sources in that first thirty to sixty minutes, the difference is practically negligible. As time passes after your workout, that advantage evaporates. After two hours, it's gone. That specific study compared Whey to low-fat milk and proved that if you're using low-fat milk, it can serve as a perfectly valid post-workout meal.
Rebecca Myers38 said:So, you're asking if this blend would be better taken during the day or first thing in the morning? Not as part of a strict post-workout protocol, but just as a supplement to pad out your daily protein macros? 🤔
Of course you can take it after your workout. There's no reason why you couldn't.🙂
If professional bodybuilders can pull it off, you have no excuse.
Arthur Sanchez79 said:Reasons? 🙂
I’ve come across this before. Essentially, rapid absorption—specifically oxidation in the liver—converts a significant portion of whey into glucose via gluconeogenesis, regardless of whether you take it with carbs or not. It's a headache. There are studies backing this up, though we're still in the "more research needed" phase. ...............
Besides, for a casual lifter, it doesn't even matter. Sure, the fast absorption of whey is a perk, but it isn't going to drastically outperform other protein sources when it comes to repairing muscle micro-trauma. In principle, you could just grab a solid meal after your workout—something like chicken breast or egg whites paired with some white bread—and the recovery effect would be virtually identical. I'm talking about the average person hitting the gym, not someone training twice a day, six days a week.
From a purely financial standpoint, I’d rather stick to supplements (whether it's straight whey or a blend) simply because it's cheaper and faster than prepping a full lunch every single day.
Arthur Sanchez79 said:Stick to standard whey. This specific blend includes casein, which slows down absorption—exactly what you don't want immediately following a workout. Casein is better suited for right before bed or as a meal replacement, though you can achieve similar results with whey too. For a casual gym-goer, the difference might be negligible since the big picture matters more, but if you have the choice, I’d go with pure whey.🙂
A blend is actually the superior route here. Manufacturers are phased out producing basic whey concentrates paired with isolates, or even just straight concentrate. Look at BSN; they don't even offer pure whey anymore, despite being known for their pro-level lines. Even Gaspari moved away from simple concentrate/isolate mixes toward their newer Myofusion Hydro line, which uses a complex protein blend.
Elite athletes almost exclusively use blends post-workout rather than plain whey.
wiredowl69 said:That's true, but it's a major factor when it comes to health.
The level of expertise you have regarding supplements is clearly reflected in those recommendations you made above.
I’ll just point out that aspartame isn't even the main issue here; most manufacturers now swap it out for sucralose, which is just as questionable from a health standpoint. This whole thing is nothing more than a marketing ploy designed to stroke the egos of people who lack experience and don't know the first thing about supplements. If you want to get technical, Dymatize makes a powder sweetened with stevia extract called Dymatize ISO100. So, if you're trying to be "healthier" than the rest of us, try using that instead.🙂
If your goal is just coaching recreational athletes, you don't need advanced certifications. Basic theoretical knowledge from standard textbooks, combined with solid results and field experience, will get the job done.
However, if you want to play in the big leagues, formal education isn't optional—it's mandatory. Short-term workshops won't cut it; working with serious athletes requires deep, foundational expertise.
In today's landscape, a coach who also understands sports nutrition holds a massive competitive edge over everyone else.
neontinker5 said:Thanks for that tip too; saved me about thirty bucks I would have wasted on Glutamine. 😉
When it comes to manufacturers, everyone is either a saint or a villain—how is a guy supposed to stay neutral when making a purchase, especially if he’s flying blind without prior experience? 🤷 Fair point, I was a bit worked up before, my bad...
I ended up grabbing 4.5lbs of PRO WHEY from MVP. Whether it actually works or not depends on my training, diet, and everything else. It cost me about $100, so the money is already spent. 🙂
Since I have an ectomorph build, if the scale doesn't move, I'm thinking about adding casein before bed. Just looking for thoughts, suggestions, or manufacturer recommendations—doesn't need to be a five-star review.
I have a bit more breathing room now.
Look, we all get agitated sometimes; I'm not always the most polite person myself. 🙂
Glutamine is one of those "scams" where manufacturers make a killing. It’s similar to L-carnitine. There is zero scientific proof that it does anything for muscle hypertrophy. It might have some minor effect on immunity or helping the body return to homeostasis, but even that field needs more research since studies aren't definitive. Unless you are an elite athlete under extreme physical stress, or someone trying to slash body fat through radical low-carb dieting or IV supplementation for a competition, there is no reason to use it.
That MWP you bought is quite sweet, which means it's loaded with artificial sweeteners, though it does mix well. In my opinion, it wasn't the best value; for the same price, you could have found 10lbs of Optimum Gold on a marketplace site, which is top-tier quality.
You don't just need protein; you need more complex carbs.
Rice, pasta, oats, potatoes (boiled with the skin on), rye bread, etc.
You didn't mention what kind of training you do?
neontinker5 said:The constant back-and-forth regarding manufacturers is irritating, but it does introduce a layer of uncertainty—especially since I’m currently out of the country when it comes to sourcing supplements.
Winter is approaching, and my stomach is already acting up because I'm ramping up my gym sessions. My goal is to pack on about 9 lbs (definitely no more than 12 lbs) of mass over the next 4 to 5 months, ideally maximizing muscle gain. To make matters worse, I have a hard time gaining weight—and losing it just as easily—which might be due to the fact that I run every single day (body fat is under 8%).
1. Any manufacturer recommendations for pure whey?
2. Any manufacturer recommendations for glutamine?
3. Any suggestions for other ingredients to add (besides dextrose)?
After cardio, I might look into using a recovery drink if necessary, but I'll deal with that later.
4. Beyond brands, can anyone give a rough estimate on quantities? How many pounds of whey and how much glutamine should I get? I don't want to buy a 5lb tub only to realize I actually need 15lbs. I want to optimize costs from the start. For context, my schedule is three 1-hour sessions and three 1-hour/20-minute sessions per week—six lifting sessions total. I'll likely be doing higher reps with lighter weights.
I'll tell you one thing right now: you don't need glutamine. As for the rest, I don't have the time to write an essay, though honestly, looking at how you phrased this request, I'm not sure why you're even asking for advice in the first place.
Ethan Smith3 said:If you’re looking for fast results, this is the most efficient way to go. It forces you to adapt to the intensity, regardless of whether you're a beginner or not.
To actually see quality results, you need to gradually scale back the intensity week by week; you can't just hammer away with High-Intensity Interval Training indefinitely.
Do you honestly think someone who doesn't even grasp supplement basics understands what High-Intensity Interval Training actually entails?
No. This type of training isn't for beginners because it's incredibly demanding; you need a solid aerobic foundation before you even attempt it.
Furthermore, you have zero clue who you're even giving advice to. You haven't asked a single fundamental question about this person's profile that would be necessary to offer even a rough suggestion.